Looking to buy a DSLR for travelling

collisster

collisster

collisster

Soldato
Joined
23 May 2006
Posts
2,590
Location
Blythe
I'm travelling Cambodia and Vietnam for 7 weeks over the summer and I need a camera to take with me!

I used to have a Nikon D50 a fair few years back and I really enjoyed it but then sold it due to being short on $$

I'm looking at a mixture of Nikon and Canon models at the moment
Canon 100D because it is v small and light - could be good for travelling
Nikon D5100/5200 apparently better IQ than the Canon

Lens wise I don't own any equipment so I'm easy as to which camera I buy (canon/nikon).
I expect to get a mixture of street photography and landscapes?
Would a wideish kit lens and a nifty 50 be ok? I don't want to take a load of lenses...

Advice appreciated!
 
For traveling I would have a careful think on whether you want a DSLR or a mirror-less setup. A m43 camera like the Olympus EPL-5 will give you DSLR image quality (better than current canon crop sensors for example) and good static focus in a very small light body with small light lenses.


EDIT: ^^^^ LOL
 
Does it have to be an slr? I can imagine an slr with lenses could become an annoyance over seven weeks, have you though about something like a sony rx100 just to reduce the load?
 
collisster said:
It may do. I prefer the use of a proper viewfinder.. Do the mirror less systems have them?
Click to expand...

A lot of them have electronic viewfinders, either built in on the larger/higher end bodies or as optional hotshoe accessories on the smaller ones, although the latter tend to be a touch expensive. It's a slightly different experience to an optical viewfinder but the current ones are really pretty good, especially when paired with bodies that have useful features such as focus peaking or live view boost for low light work. With things like touch focus on the screen I only use the EVF on mine rarely to be honest, which wasn't something I was expecting when I first switched from a DSLR.
 
Last edited:
collisster said:
It may do. I prefer the use of a proper viewfinder.. Do the mirror less systems have them?
Click to expand...

If you really want an optical viewfinder then few have them and they come at a price. The Canon 100D is the smallest and lightest DSLR with optical viewfinder around.
 
Saw a few people with mirrorless systems when on Snowdon and Tryfan. The electronic viewfinder was abysmal (was asked to take photos of them)

If going mirrorless I'd recommend ensuring that it has an articulated screen.
 
JBuk said:
Does it have to be an slr? I can imagine an slr with lenses could become an annoyance over seven weeks, have you though about something like a sony rx10 just to reduce the load?
Click to expand...
Fixed! :D
Apart from the cost, the RX10 is almost perfect as a travel camera.
 
King4aDay said:
A lot of them have electronic viewfinders, either built in on the larger/higher end bodies or as optional hotshoe accessories on the smaller ones, although the latter tend to be a touch expensive. It's a slightly different experience to an optical viewfinder but the current ones are really pretty good, especially when paired with bodies that have useful features such as focus peaking or live view boost for low light work. With things like touch focus on the screen I only use the EVF on mine rarely to be honest, which wasn't something I was expecting when I first switched from a DSLR.
Click to expand...

The ones I tried a few weeks ago are all still terrible. They lag behind when you pan and don't have anywhere near the dynamic range to show all the image. The low resolution isn't brilliant either leaving a fairly blocky image. Admittedly they may be SIGNIFICANTLY better outside of shop lighting but I have my doubts. Shooting with just a screen is a very different way of shooting as well. I use my AW1 very differently to the D7000 for example.

Unfortunately there really is nothing that can compare to an optical viewfinder yet which is annoying as I love the idea of converting to an OM-D as they are so much smaller.
 
Hmm. I don't miss an OVF at all, but then I shoot 90% landscapes and actually find an EVF advantageous in a lot of shooting situations.
 
Last edited:
Amp34 said:
The ones I tried a few weeks ago are all still terrible. They lag behind when you pan and don't have anywhere near the dynamic range to show all the image. The low resolution isn't brilliant either leaving a fairly blocky image. Admittedly they may be SIGNIFICANTLY better outside of shop lighting but I have my doubts. Shooting with just a screen is a very different way of shooting as well. I use my AW1 very differently to the D7000 for example.

Unfortunately there really is nothing that can compare to an optical viewfinder yet which is annoying as I love the idea of converting to an OM-D as they are so much smaller.
Click to expand...

I'd take the 2.44m dot EVF in my A77 over the over OVF of my D7000 all day long. The ability to have a live histogram directly in there as well instant exposure effect and DOF preview without pressing a single button makes an OVF feel medieval. Focus peaking is also bloody brilliant!

Low light is where they suffer though, I dont have any lag but it does get noisy as the gain is boosted to maintain a view. I can understand that could be a big issue for some, not so much for me though. It also kills the battery, I can get around 400 shots more on the Nikon but it's a price worth paying imo.

It's nice to have the choice.
 
The D5100 is very small and light ( I happen to have one for sale in the MM). Fair a bit smaller than the D7000.

The Pentax K30 is smaller still while offering the same image quality as the D5100 (and D7000 since they use the same sensor), but with more focus points (than the D5100) and with built in image stabilisation.
 
Yet it's still fairly small and light. The difference in weight you're talking about is less than half a 500ml bottle of water, and it's probably a logical upgrade from his D50.

The OP really needs to get himself to somewhere like WEX and pick up a few bodies and see how he likes them.

I've travelled extensively with a DSLR no problem, but I always have a day bag with some water and a snack in anyway so it's no bother. Some people might not be able to.
 
englishpremier said:
Yet it's still fairly small and light. The difference in weight you're talking about is less than half a 500ml bottle of water, and it's probably a logical upgrade from his D50.

The OP really needs to get himself to somewhere like WEX and pick up a few bodies and see how he likes them.

I've travelled extensively with a DSLR no problem, but I always have a day bag with some water and a snack in anyway so it's no bother. Some people might not be able to.
Click to expand...

Sure, if you just want a body and kit lens. But depending on how seriously you're taking the photography, the weight difference between systems for a 2-3 lens kit and a suitable sized tripod can easily be several kilos.

I agree that some hands-on testing is always useful.
 
D.P. said:
For traveling I would have a careful think on whether you want a DSLR or a mirror-less setup. A m43 camera like the Olympus EPL-5 will give you DSLR image quality (better than current canon crop sensors for example) and good static focus in a very small light body with small light lenses.


EDIT: ^^^^ LOL
Click to expand...

careful of what?

i brought my 5d3 with 3 L lenses and left it on the beach unattended while i swim in the ocean in Hoi Ann vietnam :)

I still have it with me :P

maybe overkill for some but certainly nothing to be scared of bringing any type of DSLR abroad. Just insure it and use common sense.

Weight is not an issue for me by the way. Im not an old person or have any disabilities so i am able to carry a backpack that weighs over 10kg all day long in the hot sun.

i take my photogaphy quite serious and would be gutted if i missed shots on a place i probably never would come back to again
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom